The sustainability of cotton production has become a talking point with several high profile initiatives being set up to address it. From humble beginnings organic cotton projects are now starting to bear fruit. Organic clothing is no longer confined to niche markets as demand on the high street now outstrips supply. In this year’s Rachel Carson Memorial Lecture, Camilla Toulmin describes the positive impacts these initiatives could have on real lives in West Africa[1].

One of the hallmarks of the 21st century, whether we like it or not, is the imprint of our global inter-connectedness. We must find a way to share this one and only earth, as has become only too apparent with the emission of greenhouse gases and consequent climate change, where energy use in one part of the globe can bring rising sea levels or drought on the other side of the planet. But this inter-connectedness is also true of what we choose to buy, to eat or to wear. Global systems of supply criss-cross our planet bringing goods from every corner of the earth to be combined, transformed, and sold. That means, as with climate change, that decisions we make have effects which ripple outwards to distant places, and create a backwash which hits producers we know little or nothing about. Our consumption choices can either provide new market opportunities, or erect barriers to prosperity, by perpetuating systems of exploitation which prevent producers from being able to access better prices.

In this lecture, I want to describe the situation faced by family farmers in West Africa, who rely heavily on cotton for their incomes. I want to talk about the problems they encounter in getting a reasonable price for their cotton, and the role that better market opportunities could provide for them. I want to show that we as consumers have the market power to offer them a safer and more prosperous future. We live at opposite ends of the cotton supply chain, which has at its beginning several million households across West Africa, and at the far end has millions of consumers buying anything from trainers, tee shirts and high fashion, to industrial linings, tents and curtains. That thread which links us through the cotton supply chain makes its way through a series of ginners, spinners, weavers, garment makers and other processors before we see it in high street stores and mail order catalogues.

I hope as a result of this lecture and the work of PAN UK and others, when you look at your Christmas catalogues, knowing about this thread will provide a little tug on your purse and lead you to ask – where does this cotton come from? Has it been grown and processed in decent conditions? Did farmers get a fair price? We can choose to pretend it doesn’t matter, or we can make positive choices that we know will make a difference for millions of people elsewhere who work hard but face quite a struggle to provide for themselves and their families.

This lecture is in honour of Rachel Carson whose work, and above all her book Silent Spring, transformed policy, legislation and practice in the US and elsewhere on the need to be much more careful in our management of the natural environment on which we ultimately all depend, and in particular the control of pesticides and other dangerous chemicals. Rachel Carson’s painstaking scientific work made very clear the interconnectedness of natural systems, through all the different ecological processes which form the web of life on earth. At the same time that Rachel Carson was preparing Silent Spring and giving evidence to the US Congress, another woman Barbara Ward was writing about our need to understand the interconnectedness of our global economic, environmental and political systems. This prophetic thinker, writer, and broadcaster was to go on to write the book Only One Earth, and to set up the IIED, the institute which I have the good fortune to be part of. Both women had enormous energy, intellect and charm – both had the ability to see how everything is linked together, and that you isolate parts of the system at your peril. Both women also died early from
breast cancer after hard fought battles.

Global cotton production
Cotton is one of those iconic crops that encapsulate so much of what’s good and bad about the way we live on this planet. It’s an emblem of globalisation from its earliest times. The first evidence of cotton growing comes from the Indus Valley, as early as 2,500 BC. But a range of cotton species has been grown in both the old and new world. A member of the hibiscus family, it grows best in warm, wellwatered regions. Today, world cotton production is around 25 million tonnes, with the main producers shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Distribution of world cotton fibre production

In the last 40 years, cotton production has doubled worldwide, with India and China the main sources of growth. Less well-known is the tenfold increase over the same period in cotton production from the West African region, with total production today of more than one million tonnes per year. While West African farmers now account for around 5% of total world production, they are the third or fourth largest exporters of cotton (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Leading cotton exporters, source: Foreign Agriculture Service, USDA

Genetically modified cotton is becoming increasingly important, and now represents 30% of total world production, and is grown especially in US, Australia, China and India. If trends continue, it is reckoned that half the world’s cotton will be GM by 2010. By contrast, organic cotton is currently around 32,000 tonnes of fibre in 2005-06, which represents 0.15% of total production and, while growing fast, is marginal in most systems. A large part is rainfed, but organic cotton is also being grown via drip irrigation in India and Peru. In 2005, the Fairtrade Labelling Organisation (FLO) established a set of criteria for Fairtrade cotton and there is now increasing interest in getting joint certification of Fairtrade and Organic.

Health and environmental impacts
Cotton is also an icon of what’s good and bad about global production systems, and their associated economic and environmental impacts. While widely perceived as a ‘natural’ commodity, it is one of the crops most heavily reliant on chemicals. Using 2.5% of the global land area, cotton uses 22.5% of the world’s insecticides and 8-10% of the world’s chemical fertilisers. Cotton farmers are exposed to high levels of pesticide and associated poisonings, especially in poorer countries where farmers lack the
appropriate protective equipment and may not be able to read the instructions. The World Health Organisation estimates three million instances of poisoning each year,resulting in 20,000 deaths mainly among the rural poor of developing countries. However, such estimates are probably well-below actual levels, since such incidents are not reported on a systematic basis[2]. In many regions, cotton is grown under irrigation, in fact three quarters of all cotton production is irrigated, causing a number of problems made most evident by the drying up of the Aral Sea in central Asia. Here, water has been pumped out of the great Amu and Syr Darya rivers by irrigation systems in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan for the last 40 years, bringing ecological disaster to the wider region.

Unfair trade
Cotton is also an icon of the unfair trade relations we have set up and refuse to reform. Currently the subsidies paid to cotton farmers in the EU and the US provide them with a price two to three times higher than the world market price. As a consequence, these relatively inefficient farmers in Europe and North America go on producing cotton, which must then be sold off on the world market at a loss, bringing prices down for everyone. In the US, 25,000 cotton farmers gain $3.5billion in subsidies, as part of the US Farm Bill passed by President Bush in 2001. Two million farmers in West Africa get no subsidies at all, but suffer the consequences of lower world market prices as a consequence. In global welfare terms, this makes no sense at all, but US electoral politics make reform of the Farm Bill unlikely in the short term. And this, despite Brazil having led a successful appeal to the World Trade Organisation’s dispute procedure, followed by a similar initiative by four African countries (Mali, Burkina Faso, Benin and Chad). The US government has been told that its cotton subsidies contravene the WTO provisions, but seems happy to ignore the multilateral rules when it suits its interests. The EU is not much better. A couple of weeks ago Spain more or less forced the EU to postpone the run-down of its support to cotton farmers within the Union. For one of the first times in WTO history, African countries have successfully challenged US and EU policies, on their own terms. Because West African cotton is cheaper and of better quality, the only way cotton can survive in the US and EU is by subsidising a small, declining group of farmers, the numbers of which have fallen in the US from 43,000 in 1987, to 25,000 nowadays. Hopefully, this fall will accelerate and their lobbying power disappear as a consequence.

West Africa
Lets move now from cotton globally to cotton in West Africa, where it is mainly grown in the former French colonies of Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Ivory Coast, Mali and Senegal. While cotton globally represents only 0.12% of global trade flows, for the main West African producers cotton provides 20-40% of export earnings. It is reckoned that two million farming households are producing cotton in West Africa – and if you take a cautious estimate for a household size of 10-15 people, that makes for a total population relying in part on cotton of 30 million people. If you also add in the various
other activities associated with cotton farming, this multiplies further the number of people depending on the success of the cotton harvest. We should remember that all these countries mentioned above are in the bottom 30 of the list of nations ranked in terms of their human development index[3]. This means that a rise or fall in cotton earnings can make a big difference to incomes and welfare for many millions of poor people in West Africa.

In West Africa cotton is grown almost entirely by smallholder farmers, on rainfed land. They do not irrigate their crop but rely on the fairly reliable tropical front which brings 800-1200 mms of rain from June to October each year (32-50 inches). I was in Mali in October visiting a number of villages where I used to work, including those in the cotton belt. Mali is an enormous country which lies in the heart of West Africa, shaped like a butterfly, one wing largely desert reaching up into the Sahara, the other wing providing grazing and farmland for Mali’s 12 million people. I went down to the south of the country, to Sikasso – one of the main cotton towns in Mali - and spent the day with farmers in Zaradougou. Their cotton crop was almost ready for harvest, but with continued rains they were waiting for a few more weeks to make sure that the cotton boll was completely dried out. They were also getting on with harvesting their other crops – maize, millet, groundnuts, sorghum and sesame – as cotton is part of a bigger family enterprise that includes keeping livestock, trading, and looking after orchards of mangoes and lemons.

The village of Zaradougou lies a few kilometres off the main road to Sikasso, in flat rolling savannah[4]. Areas not cultivated with cotton and cereals provide grazing and woodlands from which people gain firewood, nuts and medicines. Low-lying marshy areas are valued for growing tomatoes, onions and peppers in the dry season. Cattle, donkeys, sheep, goats and chickens provide manure, meat and milk, while most families also have a pair of draught oxen for ploughing. The village population of 650 people live in 16 households, giving an average of just over 40 people per household. These are very large complex domestic groups, usually containing a set of married brothers, their wives, children, and grandchildren, who work a common set of fields and invest in the equipment and livestock needed to make them productive. In their spare time, each member of the family tries to earn a bit of extra money to pay for clothes, cigarettes, sweets and other needs. The biggest household has more than 90 people, and has invested in a tractor, a shop, and like most of the other families has a second farm in neighbouring Côte d’Ivoire. People have been travelling to Côte d’Ivoire since the 1950s, first in the search for work, and then to acquire land through sharecropping and purchase. Like many other families in the Sikasso region, twelve of the 16 households in Zaradougou now have extensive holdings in different parts of the country, growing coffee and cocoa. Despite the Ivoirian civil war which has led to many deaths and much upheaval, Zaradougou’s families have not come home to Mali since the value and income from these plantations are considerable.

In Zaradougou, both women and men farm the household fields during the four months of ploughing, sowing, and weeding. Women try to find time for a small plot of groundnuts, vegetables and beans as well as seeking out shea-nuts to make cooking fat. Men collect firewood for sale, and invest in trade, the more successful managing to build a little shop selling anything from bicycle parts and string, to tea, sugar, biscuits and kola nuts. People have quickly picked up new technology, so that solar panels are now often seen, providing power for radios, re-charging mobile phones, and amplifying music at the regular village concerts.

Farmers in Zaradougou are still growing cotton despite the very poor returns. Currently, they are getting 165 francs per kilo of seed cotton, which is about a tenth of the world market price. It is reckoned that costs of production are more like 180-190 francs per kilo even when valuing labour at a very low daily rate. They know its barely worth growing cotton but being part of the cotton farmers’ association brings certain advantages, such as access to farm credit and fertiliser. Farmers get credit at the start of the farming season and then pay it off when the cotton comes to be collected. It is very difficult to get credit otherwise. Equally, cotton farmers get preferential access to fertiliser which although spread mainly on the cotton crop, also benefits subsequent crops of sorghum and maize, given the annual rotation of crops.

The last time I had been in Zaradougou was in 2000, when the cotton farmers had gone on strike and refused to grow cotton because the price being offered by the government-run marketing board was too low. That year, cotton production was half its normal level, with many farmers choosing to put their land under anything but cotton. And this despite government ministers coming out to lecture cotton farmers that it was their national duty to grow cotton, never mind the price. However, if cotton prices are poor, then those for many other crops are also not very promising and highly volatile. So in 2001 with so many farmers opting for sorghum and maize instead of cotton, the prices for these crops plummeted with the large increase in output - which is why farmers continue to grow cotton. One concern of farmer leaders in West Africa is the major outflow of young people from the countryside, as they see little future for themselves there, given low prices for cotton and cereals. As François Traoré, of AProCA[5] puts it: ‘if it goes on like this, we’ll come in even greater numbers to Europe, even if we have to swim underwater’.

Difficulties for cotton farmers
West African cotton farmers are facing a number of difficulties.

Low yields and prices
Cotton prices are low, yields have been static and are in some cases declining. Prices are low because of over-supply globally, thanks to the subsidies – mentioned earlier - which continue to be paid to farmers in the US and Europe to produce high cost cotton which must then be dumped on world markets. Good land is also growing scarce in the main cotton growing areas of Mali, and soil fertility is being exhausted. Diminishing fallow reduces the area available for cattle to graze and, as a consequence, reduces the quantity of dung for maintaining soil quality.

Pest resistance
Cotton pests have become resistant to pyrethrum insecticides, leading to a shift back to more powerful organochlorines, such as endosulfan. Its re-introduction has led to a rise in poisonings and deaths in Benin, and evidence of increased problems also in Mali, Senegal and Burkina Faso[6]. Such insecticides are expensive and add further to the costs per hectare of growing cotton. Farmers rarely have appropriate protective clothing and effective masks to protect them from spray, empty containers are frequently re-used to carry water, and accidental exposure is only too common. State-run extension services have been cut back, and their role taken over in some cases by pesticide companies, which provide extension advice and supply their products directly to farmers.

Pressure on land
Access to land is increasingly tight, as pressure of population growth and expansion of fields thanks to the use of ploughs have led to fallow disappearing in some areas. Land close to cities is in great demand for residential and commercial development, and commands a high and rising price. Cotton can only expand in those areas where land remains abundant, such as the south-west and west of the country. Here there is still sufficient new land and grazing reserves to allow for a well-integrated livestock-crop system.

Rainfall is uncertain
Rainfall is uncertain and no-one knows what changes global warming will bring. Farmers have faced a long term decline in rainfall and serious droughts in 1973 and 1984. This last season of 2006 has been remarkably good, with heavy rains throughout the West African savannah and Sahel, making up for a late start to the farming season. But the impacts of global warming are uncertain. While increased rainfall is possible, with a rise also in temperatures, there will be greater evaporation – hence the need to capture and make best use of what rain does fall, through better soil and water conservation.

Farmers voices are not heard
Few people listen to what farmers have to say about their vision for the future. Much of the debate on the future of African agriculture tends to take place amongst government officials, representatives of agri-business, donor agencies, and ‘experts’. It has been difficult for farmer groups to get their voices heard and their priorities taken into account. Fortunately, Mali has several farmer unions which are increasingly vocal in their demands to be heard. Their force was demonstrated during the cotton strike of 2000-01, and the government now knows that some form of consultation will be essential if they are to get approval for new initiatives. In Benin, it was the farmer organisations which insisted on a change in the formulation of endosulfan that helped reduce the incidence of poisonings. The farmer unions in Mali have also played an important role in discussing the government’s new agricultural strategy, and have ensured the priorities of smallholder farming are at least mentioned in the new text[7]. The AproCA has emerged recently as a regional body representing cotton farmers across West Africa, and plays a valuable role in lobbying for farmers’ interests at national and regional levels. Equally, the regional network of farmer organisations for West Africa (ROPPA[8]) provides a platform for farmer organisations across the region, increasingly respected by governments for the interests it represents, and its advocacy of the need to position family farming at the heart of West Africa’s agricultural strategy.

In cotton-growing areas, there is usually a village association (AV) which acts as the interface between villagers and all outside agencies, including the cotton marketing board. Set up in the 1970s, these associations play a growing role in managing credit, input supplies, and the collection, weighing and grading of cotton. Positions in the AV are held by literate men from the principal families in the village. Women rarely play a formal role in the AV or other decision-making bodies, but they have their own networks of family and neighbours through which they share resources and gain help in times of need.

Privatisation
Privatisation of the cotton marketing system in Mali is now planned for 2007-08, after the next elections. This will involve the break-up of the state-owned enterprise (CMDT)[9] that has managed the cotton sector since Independence, and the establishment of four regional cotton marketing systems each covering a distinct area of cotton production. In each region, the monopoly of cotton purchase and input delivery will be maintained but ownership will be transferred to the private sector. It is widely acknowledged that the state sector has been inefficient, lacked transparency in its operations[10], and maintained an unacceptably large margin between what farmers are paid for their crop and world market prices. The argument in favour of this wide margin has been that this surplus can then be invested by government in provision of social infrastructure such as schools, and health services. However, some would argue that such investment has not, in fact, been made. Rather, the cotton surplus has been
used to fund broader government expenditure, as well as provide a valuable source of revenue for those associated with the cotton marketing board. Additionally, farmers have often had to wait a long period for final payment on their harvests.

However, transfer of a monopoly from the state to the private sector is no guarantee of improvement in this situation. Privatisation is expected to lead to major job losses amongst staff, but no guarantee of higher prices for farmers who will not be able to take their cotton for sale elsewhere if the enterprise in their region is not offering an attractive enough price. One advantage of the state marketing system has been the pan-territorial pricing which meant that farmers were assured a given price regardless of where they live and how far they are from a tarmac road or ginning plant. It is expected that farmers will now have to organise themselves to have their cotton delivered to the ginnery. There is also talk of farmer organisations being made share-holders in these newly privatised companies, a move which some welcome, as a means for farmers to gain inside knowledge about how prices are determined. However,
others worry that this will co-opt farmer organisations into the exploitation of their own members, and reduce their political power when contesting the prices paid.

GM production
This is being pushed forcefully by several companies seeking to establish themselves in this market. Monsanto has successfully gained a foothold in Burkina Faso where farm trials of Bt cotton are underway, and there is talk of Mali also deciding in favour of farm trials, following the visit of high ranking officials to Switzerland. The USAID missions in West Africa are also keen to see countries adopt ‘new technologies’, and are training national scientists in various biotechnology skills. GM cotton sells itself on the grounds that less insecticide is needed than with conventional varieties, but serious concerns surround longer term pest resistance, and the commercial monopoly exercised by a few agri-businesses over GM seed and input supply. Once GM cotton is firmly established in the West African region this will make it difficult if not impossible to establish an effective organic production system. A citizens’ jury was held recently in Sikasso, hosted by the regional assembly, to allow public debate on whether to adopt GM cotton[11]. This jury brought together 45 women and men farmers from different villages in the Sikasso region to interrogate a total of 14 experts on the pros and cons of Bt cotton. Such expert witnesses were drawn from research, government, agribusiness, donor agencies, NGOs and farmers from India and South Africa who have been growing Bt cotton for some time. Over a four day period of enquiry, farmers were able to question these experts and come to their own conclusions about the merits and risks of taking up this new crop. The verdict from the farmers’ jury was unanimously in favour of banning GM cotton. Their conclusions included that: researchers should engage more with farmers and focus on improving traditional varieties, government should take a lead in promoting organic and low input agriculture, local seed varieties from a range of crops should be better conserved so they do not disappear, and better access to farmerfield schools was needed, especially for women. At the same time, farmers argued for a closer monitoring of food imports into Mali to prevent local markets being swamped by cheap food from elsewhere.

It remains to be seen how far government will take such voices into account. A decision on whether to grow GM crops is likely to wait until after the 2007 presidential elections, to avoid this becoming a party political issue.

Given these different problems of price, yield, and poisonings, organic cotton production would seem the obvious solution. Organic cotton projects show that it is possible to cut out dependence on toxic chemicals, while integrated pest management methods demonstrate how to substantially reduce levels of pesticide use. But expansion of organic cotton also faces some challenges. Currently Mali produces 1,500 tonnes of organic seed cotton, mainly in the south west of the country, an area into which cotton has moved recently, with the help of Helvetas, the Swiss NGO. Here, the soils are rich in organic matter, being new to cotton cultivation. This represents only 0.3% of the country’s current production of more than 500,000 tonnes, but organic output has been growing fast. M&S has been buying much of this Fairtrade organic cotton. But it is difficult to see organic production becoming mainstream throughout Mali, especially in the older areas of cotton production where soil fertility has been depleted over several decades, without a major commitment from buyers to offer long term contracts for assured supply. Organic pest management would need to be complemented by improvements in soil quality, and substantial additions of organic matter, from green manures, composting and cattle dung. These resources also consume land and place a limit on where organic cotton can be grown.

Organic production depends on a considerable input of time and resources from projects such as those of Helvetas. It is unclear how they can expand in scale and move beyond the project level, though it is the stated intention of Helvetas that these become self-sustaining projects in the near future. While organic production involves greater input of labour throughout the season, the price per kg is much better than that for conventional cotton – at 240 francs/kg of seed cotton. Farmers are pleased by the results in terms of lower input costs, higher prices and reduced health problems. In addition, organic cotton farmers tend to get paid promptly on delivery of the crop, rather than the uncertain payment often several months late that conventional cotton farmers experience. Nevertheless, there remain the questions of how to cover costs during the conversion period, and of obtaining certification of organic status, as well as what happens when the project withdraws. Equally, given cotton’s role within a three year crop rotation, it would be helpful if farmers could also benefit from a price premium for organic production of cereals, groundnuts and sesame grown in years two and three of the rotation.

While I was in Mali, I went to see a number of people working on the cotton issue and plans to develop new markets, especially for organic and other high value forms of cotton. There are currently four different initiatives underway in West Africa aimed at developing new markets for cotton (see below). These all focus on the farming system, since there is very little processing of the crop into thread and cloth within the region. There has been a certain amount of competition between these different initiatives but there are now moves to bring them together in a more coherent way, as evidenced by a meeting held by AProCA in Burkina Faso in November 2006.

Four cotton initiatives
These initiatives all aim to increase returns for cotton farmers.

Organic cotton (EU)
In Mali, organic cotton has been promoted by the Swiss NGO Helvetas. The standard used is very demanding in terms of production system, and supply chains, being based on the EU, which follows universal criteria for all organic production, whether crops, livestock or labelling of produce. The price is determined by what the market will bear, and producers receive a floor price usually substantially above conventional produce. Knowledge of organic cotton is becoming well known and demand is rising. But in practice, not all organic produce can be sold at the premium, while some major buyers do not engage because they are unsure of getting sufficient volume and quality. There are a number of other west African cotton projects, such as the OBEPAB project in Benin, set up in 1996 with the support of PAN UK. And in Senegal, farmers in the Tambacounda province have been producing organic cotton since 1995 coordinated by the NGO ENDA. Organic cotton is now also being produced in Burkina thanks to Helvetas.

Fairtrade cotton
Standards for Fairtrade cotton have recently been developed to cover farm production. Max Havelaar and the Fairtrade Labelling Organisation (FLO) have been the driving force in West Africa linking ecological criteria with fair trade and social justice concepts. While Fairtrade cotton is not necessarily organic, a double certification is possible which combines both sets of criteria. The price received is set by FLO, according to costs of production, with a premium on top, and is considerably above the conventional price. Farmers benefit in part because of the shorter supply chain.

‘Cotton Made In Africa’
This project is an initiative of the German company OTTO, German technical agency GTZ and cotton companies in Bénin and Burkina Faso. The aim is to support more sustainable and productive cotton farming, and use of pest management methods, which aim to reduce levels of pesticide use, though they continue to use calendar spraying. There are a number of social indicators, such as no use of child labour. Direct relations with textile companies should allow for substantial market growth, but the project is just at the beginning. It is unclear if farmers will receive a premium.

‘Better Cotton Initiative’
This initiative of UNEP, WWF and others is in the preparatory phase, with the establishment of structures and advisory boards to oversee the work. These will set the indicators for different regions (West Africa, Asia, Brazil) with the aim of creating common standards. As with Fairtrade cotton, the criteria are both social and environmental, but the purpose is to set standards at a level which could bring in as many as 50% of cotton producers, rather than the much smaller proportion likely to attain the Fairtrade and organic mark, estimated at around 5%. However, it is not clear when BCI cotton will be ready for sale.

These initiatives promise a broader range of options for cotton farmers in Mali and elsewhere in West Africa. What can consumers do to speed these initiatives? How can you use your purchasing power to shift these production systems in favour of cotton produced in ways which sustain both the social fabric and the natural environment? How can we also be sure that these various initiatives do indeed bring better prices to farmers? Otherwise the benefits will be taken by other people in the supply chain – such as those providing certification, the integrated pest management system, or the retail outlet.

Innovative pest control for organic cotton Some organic farmers gain yields comparable with conventional growers. However, the increased labour required for organic pest control means that all farmers want better ways to manage pests. A new approach has been developed by Dr Robert Mensah, an award-winning scientist from Ghana, who currently leads work on sustainable pest management at the Australian Cotton Research Institute. Dr Mensah seeks to enhance the role of beneficial insects in managing pests, using ‘food attractants’ sprayed on the crop during peak pest attacks. ‘Refuge’ crops provide a home for beneficial insects between peak attacks. Indigenous flora provide the refuge crop and material for making food sprays. Dr Mensah works with local partners to identify appropriate local plants, and train lead farmers in recognising pests and predators, testing natural pest control techniques and managing soil fertility.

What you can do
● Look out for organic and ‘sustainable’ cotton products. There’s a guide to organic cotton clothing on PAN UK’s website with mailorder and high street shops listed by locality. Equally, magazines like the Ecologist, and Resurgence list green shopping opportunities. Put your Christmas shopping to good use.
● Support NGOs which are working closely with farmer associations in West Africa to help shift to more sustainable systems. PAN UK for example receives many more requests from farmers for help to shift towards organic than it is able to fund. One example is the Benin organic cotton project[12].
● Tell the major retailers engaged with these initiatives that you approve of their strategy and look forward to buying their product once delivered to the high street. Tell them not to niche market the ethical and organic goods, while driving a race to the bottom in the mainstream clothing market. Ask them how ethical it can be to sell organic and Fairtrade alongside £5 shirts and £3 jeans. It’s impossible to pay a living wage or respect the environment when prices are so low. The recent report Who pays for cheap clothes? reveals a chain of misery and exploitation, polluted soils and poisoned water supplies[13]. Retailers can drive a major improvement in prices and production systems, but they need to hear from you – the shopper – that this is what you want.
● Write to your MP to ask government whether they intend using the enormous power associated with procuring goods and services to promote organic production, not just for British produce, but also in terms of overseas supplies. We could campaign to persuade the Ministry of Defence to kit out our soldiers in organic khaki in future.
● Campaign for trade and tax policies which provide positive preferences for more sustainable products. At the moment, it’s the other way round – producers of certified goods have to find funds to get certified and establish a separate supply chain.

While there are many benefits from the market economy, it has its disadvantages when we try to shift towards a fairer more sustainable planet. There are many strong, wellfunded interest groups engaged in trying to get farmers to use more and more inputs, like GM crops and associated chemical treatments. These commercial interests lobby hard in order to get governments and producers to buy their products. The organic movement and low input movements have no equivalent industry lobby group, yet we need to build a set of incentives which encourage farmers and governments to see the benefits of using fewer inputs rather than more. The pound in your pocket can be a key means of making this happen. But don’t forget that there is another battle, which is more invisible, involving negotiation of the terms of trade to be agreed at the WTO, the Economic partnership Agreements, and in bilateral trade discussions. The pound in your pocket and your Christmas catalogue choices do not replace the vote for a ‘fairer trade’ policy at international level. You can do both.

I would like to finish by returning to the beginning with a couple of quotes from Barbara Ward and Rachel Carson. Ward in her book Only One Earth said ‘We have forgotten how to be good guests, how to walk lightly on the earth as other creatures do.’A point which echoes loudly Rachel Carson’s own words – ‘The human race is challenged more than ever before to demonstrate our mastery, not over nature, but of ourselves.’

How we dress, how we shop, how heavily we walk on this earth will determine whether we have indeed been good guests, and how we have mastered ourselves. Thank you.

1. With particular thanks to Joost Nelen, Thea Hilhorst, Damien Sanfilippo, Barbara Dinham, Simon Ferrigno, and Bill Vorley for comments and corrections. However, I accept all responsibility for any errors. [location in text]
2. Living with poison. Glin CL, Vodouhê DS, Kuiseu J, Thiam A, Dinham B and Simon Ferrigno
PAN UK, London, 2006. [location in text]
3. The Human Development Index of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). [location in text]
4. Sustainable rural livelihoods in Mali, K Brock and N Coulibaly, IDS Research Report no.35, Brighton, 1999. [location in text]
5. Association des Producteurs de Coton Africains. [location in text]
6. Op. cit. 2. [location in text]
7. La loi d’orientation agricole. [location in text]
8. Réseau des Organisations Paysannes et Producteurs Agricoles de l’Afrique de l’Ouest. [location in text]
9. Compagnie Malienne pour le Développement des Fibres Textiles. [location in text]
10. People speak of the CMDT as a ‘black box’ so far as accounting practices are concerned. [location in text]
11. For details, www.iied.org/naturalresources/sabl. [location in text]
12. Visit www.pan-uk.org for further details. [location in text]
13. Clean Clothes Campaign Report, 2006. www.cleanclothes.org [location in text]